« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Wade Gets 30 Months For Bribing Cunningham
Mitchell Wade, the contractor who in 2006 pleaded guilty to bribing Duke Cunningham to the tune of over $1 million, was sentenced moments ago to 30 months in federal prison, and ordered to pay a $25,000 fine.
The relative leniency of the sentence suggests that Wade may have provided prosecutors with valuable information as they seek to build cases against others involved in the scandal.
A memo filed by Wade's lawyers two weeks ago claimed that he had helped prosecutors look into five other members of Congress.
Cunningham is currently serving an eight-year sentence in connection with the scandal.
Advertisement
Josh
Zachary
Five other Congressmen? I'm on pins and needles.
Judging from that picture, this hog has been at the public trough for too long. Perhaps a penitentary diet will do him some good.
December 15, 2008 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone else believe that 30 months sentence and a $25,000 fine is just a little bit too lenient for a crime that diverted millions of dollars from hard working commoners, probably preventing some of them from sending their children to college and preventing others from getting health care needed.
These crimes committed against our democracy and citizens cause MUCH more damage than those committed against individual citizens, yet in our new improved version of government, accountability is pretty much absent at the higher levels... somewhat akin to dictatorships and oligarchies... IMHO
December 15, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good thing he wasn't trying to get his trophies back. He could have gotten 14 years!
December 15, 2008 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Johhnnydoughey,I think you are missing the point. The crime against our democracy was committed when the congresscritters accepted the bribes in exchange for favors.
Wade cooperated extensively with the feds, singing like a canary to be as helpful as he could. Because he did so, many much more corrupt individuals will do more time than he did. I'm not happy with it, but it's how prosecutors build cases against bigger birds. Cunningham got 8 years, if I'm not mistaken, and probably would have done more if he wasn't as old as he is. Five more Congressman getting similar sentences, and who knows how many else caught up in the investigation?
I'm okay with that, and fail to see how it means "accountability is pretty much absent at the higher levels."
I'm not saying it's ideal. What I am saying is that it's not nearly as bad as you are trying to make it sound.
December 15, 2008 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink